
pmid: 29040443
Recent studies have identified various bacterial groups that are altered in dogs with chronic inflammatory enteropathies (CE) compared to healthy dogs. The study aim was to use quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays to confirm these findings in a larger number of dogs, and to build a mathematical algorithm to report these microbiota changes as a dysbiosis index (DI). Fecal DNA from 95 healthy dogs and 106 dogs with histologically confirmed CE was analyzed. Samples were grouped into a training set and a validation set. Various mathematical models and combination of qPCR assays were evaluated to find a model with highest discriminatory power. The final qPCR panel consisted of eight bacterial groups: total bacteria, Faecalibacterium, Turicibacter, Escherichia coli, Streptococcus, Blautia, Fusobacterium and Clostridium hiranonis. The qPCR-based DI was built based on the nearest centroid classifier, and reports the degree of dysbiosis in a single numerical value that measures the closeness in the l2 - norm of the test sample to the mean prototype of each class. A negative DI indicates normobiosis, whereas a positive DI indicates dysbiosis. For a threshold of 0, the DI based on the combined dataset achieved 74% sensitivity and 95% specificity to separate healthy and CE dogs.
Male, Bacteria, Microbiota, Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction, Feces, Dogs, Animals, Dysbiosis, Female, Dog Diseases, Algorithms
Male, Bacteria, Microbiota, Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction, Feces, Dogs, Animals, Dysbiosis, Female, Dog Diseases, Algorithms
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 251 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 0.1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
